Knowledge exchange: a two-way street

David Caffall, Chief Executive of the Agricultural Industries Confederation (AIC) reflects on the role of the agri-supply industry in linking research and practice.    

The recent workshop, hosted by Landbridge on 1 May, brought together key components from within the knowledge exchange pipeline, ranging from experts involved in R&D and professional’s delivering advice at the coal-face to farmers across the country.

Whilst the focus of the discussions during the day centred on the role that the land professions could play in linking the laboratory and the farm, it is important that we don’t lose sight of a vital mechanism which already exists to effectively connect researchers with farmers and vice versa.

Over the years businesses across the agri-supply industry have made significant inroads by developing collaborative relationships with Research Councils, levy bodies, leading universities, veterinary schools and Centres of Excellence. They also invest over £45 million each year in their own near-market research (including field and animal feeding trials, laboratory studies and farm pilot studies), to explore the innovative potential from research conducted in the public sector. This ensures that the latest science is readily available to their extensive army of professional advisers for translation onto farms across the UK.

Just a year ago AIC published it’s Ring of Confidence model[1]  which demonstrates the trusted relationship that farmers have with their professional advisers such as agronomists/crop advisers, feed advisers, seed representatives and grain traders. This relationship means that advisers provide a feed-back loop back to the R&D community and shows how the channels of communication have been opened up so that knowledge exchange is very much a ‘two-way street’.

Engagement with the R&D base to drive the translation of science onto farms has to be a priority as knowledge transfer is simply only one half of the story. We need to draw on the experience of existing models that best effect a knowledge exchange with feed-back loops which aren’t closed and facilitate the exchange of knowledge from researcher to farmers and farmers to researchers.

---

[1] AIC (2013) Value of Advice Report

Closing the circle?

Agronomist Patrick Stephenson gives his thoughts on the links between research and practice following the landbridge workshop on May 1^st.

Newcastle University via the Centre for Rural Economy hosted a landbridge workshop and discussion on the link between research and implementation. I was a panel member as a practising agronomist commenting my thoughts on how research findings are delivered to the farmer and grower to improve production systems and outputs. Other speakers included veterinary, environmental consultants and farmers. From an agronomic perspective research and innovation are practiced daily by farmers and growers around the country. The use of the most recently developed pesticides; precision farming and environmental land management by farmers and growers are all the outcome of research done previously by scientists. What are the issues if this is deemed not to be successful? Agriculture has been a recession hit industry for some 20 +years this has also coincided with the Governments withdrawal of money from work deemed to be “near market”  has meant that the downstream users of generated research have no attachment to the science . If we add to this the reverse analogy namely detachment of researchers from the end user, and the lack of opportunities for the free flow of information through the whole chain from scientist to advisor to practitioner to consumer and back, then progress will not be made. Science and research will remain trapped in a spiral of research justification and papers long lost in the archives under who cares? Can we do anything about this? In my opinion yes! The researcher has to be aware of the end user NOT the research funder but the target audience. Each project, thesis, and program should seek to have links in the relevant subjects for example:-

Issue of compaction on re-instated soils

This could have a soil scientist, an agricultural engineer, a utility company and an agronomist

Natural resistance to Saddle Gall Midge

This could have an entomologist a plant breeder, geneticist, and an affected grower.

I can feel researchers screaming at the screen reading this saying we do this already. Unfortunately, if you do then the end message is being woefully lost. Researchers must once more be in the spotlight not consigned to the backroom; to do this requires integration throughout the industry. Only then will we understand the science and research and be advocates of it. Science must be presented as accessible and important not a sound bite on the national news.

Organisations that could help facilitate this need pulling together, could landbridge be the answer? Possibly but it certainly could be a catalyst.

Was this meeting useful?  Yes.

Could something be done?  Yes

Will something evolve? Who knows?

Making the Link – Research and Practice

Chloe Palmer, farm and environment adviser, reflects on the landbridge workshop ‘Taking stock of the links between research and the land professions’ and what this means out in the field

It has always been tough for farmers and advisers to find time in their increasingly hectic schedules to keep themselves updated on research findings. 

So the event at the British Academy on 1^st May organised by Newcastle University’s Landbridge Network was a welcome opportunity for me to hear and discuss how links could be improved between research and practice to make it easier for those on the front line to influence and gain access to land-based research.



Practitioner panel discussion featuring Tony Pexton (2nd left)
and James Husband (1st right)



Tony Pexton OBE summed up the challenge ahead by referring to his son Will and the needs of their family farming business in East Yorkshire. He can see how climate change, rising costs and declining resource availability will mean the future farmer’s job is a difficult one. Research will always have to be one step ahead to provide the answers, but then those findings must also be made available in an easily accessible format to those who need them most.

I was recently lucky enough to interview a family at a state of the art dairy unit in Nottinghamshire. The unit is managed by the two sons and daughter in their twenties and this team of forward thinking, highly intelligent and committed farmers are driven by the desire to continually improve the performance of their dairy herd.

Not content with relying on the extensive experience of their family and neighbours, the Bacon family work closely with their own vets and the veterinary team at the University of Nottingham. This allows them access to the latest findings to help them tackle mastitis and to improve their management of dry cows and fertility.

They also have an excellent relationship with their dairy consultant who considers how nutrition, housing and the management of groups of cows might help to increase yield.

James Husband, a Dairy Consultant speaking at the Landbridge event in London referred to the challenges facing dairy farmers but also recognised the role of the much belied supermarkets. Mr Husband pointed out the supermarkets are a key driver of higher standards in many aspects of dairy production and they are also promoting the flow of information between researchers and practitioners.

This view was confirmed by the Bacons who are delighted that as a member of the Sainsbury’s Sustainable Dairy Group, they are supported by their buyer to strive for continual improvement in all aspects of cow welfare and environmental efficiency.

The discussions at the British Academy are hopefully just the start of an exciting initiative which will see better links between universities, research establishments, advisers and their representative bodies and of course, farmers. Better communication between these groups is imperative if the industry is to continue to benefit from the best and most relevant research findings which will be so pivotal to the future of food production in the UK.

Taking stock of the links between research and the land professions

Fiona Mannix, Associate Director Land Group at the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors gives her reflections on the latest landbridge workshop which aimed to identify how knowledge exchange might be improved between research providers and the land professions

On 1 May I had the pleasure of attending a Landbridge workshop at the British Academy. Landbridge, who we are keenly involved with, is a knowledge exchange network for researchers and rural professionals who advise farming and land businesses. The workshop was titled Taking Stock of the Links between Research and the Land Professions.

Landbridge believes that improving land management is imperative to such objectives as food security, sustainable development and the management of environmental change, and land professionals are vital to this process. In recent years the land professions themselves have recognised both the need to update their own knowledge and skills through programmes of continuing professional development, and the demand from land managers for more specialised advice. At the same time, research funders have begun investing in major research programmes into land use challenges. But a gap still exists between research and practice and we lack effective models for knowledge transfer and exchange.

The government’s Agricultural Technologies Strategy  notes that the UK has strengths in research vital to agriculture and related technologies and innovative and dynamic farmers. What are less clear are the priorities for the advice and service networks that support agriculture and what role the land professions could play in linking ‘the laboratory and the farm’.  Shortcomings can range from how land professionals are able to engage with research (be it public or private; basic, applied or strategic) or find out about research findings, to how the professions are placed in relation to research decision making and agenda setting. Knowledge exchange between the professions and researchers needs to be improved so that land professionals are better sensitised to the latest research, while research has to be more responsive to the contemporary challenges of land management and professional practice.

The workshop was chaired by Sue Steer, Chair of the RICS Countryside Polices Panel and a member of the Landbridge advisory panel. The day opened with a number of presentations on a range of topics and some personal views of the issues involved in linking research into practice from a range of people including agronomists, vets, farmers, environmental and agricultural consultants were expressed. Lunch was followed by more presentations which explored different models, strategies and contexts of linking research and professional practice. These were followed by a practical exercise which involved six tables with facilitators, of which I was one.

The overall aim of the workshop was to identify how knowledge exchange might be improved between research providers and the land professions and the key questions addressed by the tables included:

■How are research agendas responding to the needs of the land professions?

■What knowledge exchange approaches and mechanisms have been adopted and how could they be improved?

■How can agriculture and land advisory professions’ expertise better inform public and private research priorities and programmes?

Participants at the six tables were tasked with discussing a number of specifics. At my table we were tasked with ultimately highlighting the top five constraints currently preventing professions’ expertise from informing public and private research priorities and programmes and the top five priorities for action which will allow better links and communication so that expertise from professions and industry can inform research priorities and programmes. Personally this was a very worthwhile exercise with some very solid suggestions coming through for future actions.

All who attended felt it was a valuable and much needed event with some key issues raised and, most importantly of all, some strong solutions mooted and action points developed by all tables that can be followed up on going forward in order to ensure that research and professional practice are as closely linked as possible. All feedback is currently being collated by Landbridge and will be disseminated via RICS Rural Practice Update in due course.

RICS Rural Professional Group and Countryside Policies Panel look forward to continued engagement and involvement with Landbridge. Landbridge is administered by the Centre for Rural Economy at Newcastle University. RICS Land Journal regulatory features research findings from the Rural Economy and Land Use programme based at the centre.

This blog is reprinted from a comment piece posted on the RICS website on 7^th May 2014:

http://www.rics.org/uk/knowledge/news-insight/comment/landbridge/

Linking the laboratory and the farm

Professor Dianna Bowles, Chair of the Advisory Group of the new Farmer Scientist Network of the Yorkshire Agricultural Society (YAS), summarises the context of the Network and how it will work to benefit farmers and the rural environment.

The YAS has a track record of innovative strategies to support British farming and funds a substantial grant and education portfolio. With its large national membership, networks and reputation for supporting excellence in agriculture, the Society is ideally placed to provide a gateway of information flow between the farming community and the research community of scientists and technologists.

The latest initiative is the setting up of the Farmer-Scientist Network – and a new opportunity for farmers and scientists to talk with one another. There are many new technologies and scientific breakthroughs to benefit agriculture, whether the livestock or arable sectors. Through meeting and discussions, emerging problems facing farmers can be raised, solutions suggested and opportunities for innovation identified.

The new Network has an Advisory Group of farmers and scientists to steer its activities. These have proven track records of expertise and success that they can bring to the discussions, as well as extensive and broad ranging contacts in their own sectors of activity throughout the UK and beyond.

As opportunities for actions and problems needing solutions become identified, an Advisory Group member in the relevant sector will assemble a specialised team of relevant expertise to address the issues. The team could involve business expertise, technologists, researchers or any specialists needed to benefit the discussions, design a creative way forward and go out to gain funding to make change happen.

We look forward to working closely with the science and farming communities and helping to ensure sustainable productivity for agriculture in the years to come.

For further information on the network see http://www.farmerscientistnetwork.co.uk/

Systemic solutions at the landscape-water interface: don’t be put off by the title!

Kate Russell of the Central Association of Agricultural Valuers explores the role advisers can play in supporting the management of land and water following the recent landbridge-sponsored workshop ‘Systemic solutions at the landscape-water interface’

Despite the unlikely venue, and a title that might have seemed off-putting to some, a day at Bristol Aquarium discussing ways to secure value from non-market “ecosystem services” proved to be time well spent.

There is a great deal of policy interest in finding ways to incentivise farmers and land managers to deliver goods or services, such as peat restoration or improved water quality, which are not typically paid for by traditional markets. With competing demands on a smaller rural development budget, policy makers hope that others – such as water companies – will step into the breach and offer new funding streams.  However, despite the focus on need driving the debate, less thought has perhaps been given to how those services will finally be secured – what would make it attractive for a landholder (with the many issues that bear on him) to sell the use of his land in such ways?

The opportunities may be most obvious where there is a clear cost saving for the private sector and examples offered to delegates included the use of integrated constructed wetlands as an alternative to traditional (and costly) water treatment works and the use of agronomists employed by a water company to advise farmers on specific actions to reduce nitrate or metaldehyde pollution in target catchments, so removing pollution at source. The lesson here was that where there is a “buyer” with an identified need, it can be possible to incentivise “sellers” to meet that need.

We at the Central Association of Agricultural Valuers can see the prospect for commercial deals to be done in the market place where there is sufficient common ground between the parties, with the need for professional advice on their options. A commercial deal would be a more practical and sustainable long term solution than relying on funding through schemes such as the (now effectively closed) Higher Level Stewardship Scheme, which is being used to fund some of the examples quoted to delegates. Those schemes are time limited (HLS has been long at 10 years) yet the agreements needed here may run for much longer.  Moreover, the funds do not come directly from the “buyer” – what does that say about the buyer’s commitment? Changes to land management which deliver hydrological benefits can have very long term implications for land use and so are better dealt with by a longer term agreement with the buyer paying directly for the services provided to them.

Our day at Bristol Aquarium could not hope to provide all the answers to these and other important questions – such as “how do you value a healthy water catchment?” – but it was useful in bringing together, in stimulating debate, academics and policy makers with those who are involved in advising farmers and land managers. I hope to be part of the continuing conversation on this topic so that we can try to develop practical win-win solutions, husbanding and harvesting the environment to benefit farmers, the wider community and the future.

Kate Russell

Central Association of Agricultural Valuers

Ecosystem services and the land-based professions – telling it how it is

Charles Cowap (chartered surveyor, Knowledge for Professional Practice), Prof Mark Reed and Prof Alister Scott (Birmingham City University) reflect on how the landbridge event on ecosystems services held in June helped inform a new policy and practice note exploring how land advisers can incorporate ecosystem services thinking into their everyday practice.

The language of ecosystem services can be disenfranchising and alienating, but it’s here to stay.  And however off-putting we may find the jargon, the concept itself really does provide a new lens through which to view traditional land use problems and opportunities. We have to get past the jargon to appreciate the added value and ensure its widespread assimilation into daily practice through continuing professional development and lifelong learning. 

When a group of land-based professionals came together recently under the auspices of landbridge to talk about these issues, there was concern that ecosystem services was an overly academic idea for the adviser in his or her day-to-day practice.  It was only after an amount of discussion and breaking down of the jargon that participants began to get to grips with what is involved.  There was an emerging consensus around the importance of place-making and place identity, benefits, risk and resilience as key unifying hooks to engage practice and understanding.  At that event, Alister Scott and colleagues from Birmingham City University even remodelled the Biblical story of Ahab and Naboth (Kings C21), with Charles Dickens’ Scrooge for modern times, using Provisioning, Regulating, Supporting and Cultural ecosystem services in a dream of land use futures.   This certainly helped to make the concepts more real for us.

The ecosystem services framework, and the wider Ecosystems Approach that it came from, promises changes to the way in which we all do our jobs, to the valuation, appraisal and management of the natural environment.   It could transform the way we manage land, undertake development, value assets, appraise plans, programmes and projects, and pay for a range of goods and services. This has far-reaching implications for the land-based professions, including for example, planners, chartered surveyors, agricultural lawyers, the agricultural supply industry and advisors such as agronomists and nutrition advisors, working in areas such as valuation, estate and property management, construction, property development and environmental services. 

So delegates at the event in Birmingham were calling for more tools that would help them to develop their professional knowledge.  They wanted, "a robust and mainstreamed toolkit", "tools for practical implementation of scientific and policy work into practice" and recognised the need for “professional confidence in an approach that has political support".  This in turn led to calls for "advocacy and promotion to a wider audience".

Some practitioners were curious as to " …how to value alternative land uses", while others stressed the "... role of [the] agricultural supply industry in knowledge transfer and policy adoption by farmers", coupled with a comment that "greater consideration is needed as to how to influence farmers to work for the environmental public goods".  This was also reflected by another participant’s comment about, "the need to identify win-win strategies to achieve adoption of environmental policies by land managers seeking to make a living".

A potential disconnect between current agricultural policy and the government’s adoption of the Ecosystems Approach in the Natural Environment White Paper was recognised by one comment, "Sustainable intensification as outlined in Prof Beddington's Foresight Report is the basis of future agricultural policies.  What is the role of the ecosystems approach in meeting this policy objective?"  A pertinent question indeed!

Researchers were also left with some questions from the event, for example one commented on a lesson learned: "knowing how non-academics view and use the Ecosystems Approach, learning the research priorities of these professionals", and recognising the importance of  "....the link to farming groups and related professional advice giving sectors".

A recurring theme was the importance of, "valuing things which have traditionally been unvalued and therefore neglected or exploited".  There was also a clearly articulated need for more accessible and concise information. 

Landbridge hopes to go some way towards filling that gap.  A new Policy and Practice note will be coming out, authored by us and with input from all the participants, enabling the ‘people on the ground’ to use ecosystem services in their practical land management.